Aneurysms

Men aged 65-75 years with a history of smoking should undergo one-time screening for abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA), but clinicians can selectively screen men in this age group who don’t smoke, according to updated recommendations from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force published in JAMA.

The task force issued a B recommendation for screening men aged 65-75 years with a smoking history and a C recommendation for selectively screening male never smokers in this age group in an update to the previous recommendations issued in 2014.

The task force also recommended against screening for AAA in women with no history of smoking (D recommendation) and cited insufficient evidence to make recommendations about AAA screening for women with a history of smoking or a family history of AAA (I statement).

The current prevalence of AAA in the United States is unclear because of the low rate of screening, but data from countries including the United Kingdom, Sweden, Denmark, and New Zealand have shown a decline in AAA among screened men aged 65 years and older, according to the USPSTF report.

Risk factors for AAA include smoking, male gender, older age, and having a first-degree relative with AAA, the task force noted.

In an evidence review accompanying the recommendations, Janelle M. Guirguis-Blake, MD, of the University of Washington, Tacoma, and colleagues analyzed data from 33 studies. They found a significant reduction in AAA-related mortality over 12-15 years’ follow-up among men aged 65 years and older who underwent AAA screening, compared with unscreened controls (odds ratio, 0.65). In addition, the risk of ruptures related to AAA was significantly lower over 12-15 years among men who underwent screening, compared with unscreened controls (OR, 0.62). However, no significant difference was noted in all-cause mortality over 12-15 years between screened and unscreened groups (relative risk, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.98-1.00).

Data from four studies of early surgery to treat small aneurysms showed no significant difference in AAA-related mortality or all-cause mortality.

“Screening for AAA entails a simple, noninvasive, and focused ultrasonography examination that costs roughly $50. The only potential harms are the psychologic burden of knowing of the presence of an aneurysm and the risk of elective surgery,” wrote Marc Schermerhorn, MD, of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, in an accompanying editorial published in JAMA Surgery (doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2019.5234).

“The latter can be calculated for each patient, weighed against the risk of rupture, and together with the estimated life expectancy, should be factored into the decision to screen and the decision to operate. We as a country can do better to detect and treat this disease cost effectively for all appropriate patients including women and elderly individuals,” he said.

Dr. Schermerhorn noted that overall the recommendations are reasonable, but he expressed concern for three populations excluded from the guidelines that warrant additional consideration: nonsmokers with equivalent risk factors, patients older than 75 years, and women. “In the meantime, we should work to ensure that patients determined appropriate by the USPSTF are actually screened,” he said.

The USPSTF is supported by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose. Dr. Schermerhorn disclosed relationships with Abbott, Cook Medical, Endologix, Medtronic, and Philips.

SOURCE: Guirguis-Blake JM et al. JAMA. 2019. doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.17021.
 

Men aged 65-75 years with a history of smoking should undergo one-time screening for abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA), but clinicians can selectively screen men in this age group who don’t smoke, according to updated recommendations from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force published in JAMA.

The task force issued a B recommendation for screening men aged 65-75 years with a smoking history and a C recommendation for selectively screening male never smokers in this age group in an update to the previous recommendations issued in 2014.

The task force also recommended against screening for AAA in women with no history of smoking (D recommendation) and cited insufficient evidence to make recommendations about AAA screening for women with a history of smoking or a family history of AAA (I statement).

The current prevalence of AAA in the United States is unclear because of the low rate of screening, but data from countries including the United Kingdom, Sweden, Denmark, and New Zealand have shown a decline in AAA among screened men aged 65 years and older, according to the USPSTF report.

Risk factors for AAA include smoking, male gender, older age, and having a first-degree relative with AAA, the task force noted.

In an evidence review accompanying the recommendations, Janelle M. Guirguis-Blake, MD, of the University of Washington, Tacoma, and colleagues analyzed data from 33 studies. They found a significant reduction in AAA-related mortality over 12-15 years’ follow-up among men aged 65 years and older who underwent AAA screening, compared with unscreened controls (odds ratio, 0.65). In addition, the risk of ruptures related to AAA was significantly lower over 12-15 years among men who underwent screening, compared with unscreened controls (OR, 0.62). However, no significant difference was noted in all-cause mortality over 12-15 years between screened and unscreened groups (relative risk, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.98-1.00).

Data from four studies of early surgery to treat small aneurysms showed no significant difference in AAA-related mortality or all-cause mortality.

“Screening for AAA entails a simple, noninvasive, and focused ultrasonography examination that costs roughly $50. The only potential harms are the psychologic burden of knowing of the presence of an aneurysm and the risk of elective surgery,” wrote Marc Schermerhorn, MD, of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, in an accompanying editorial published in JAMA Surgery (doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2019.5234).

“The latter can be calculated for each patient, weighed against the risk of rupture, and together with the estimated life expectancy, should be factored into the decision to screen and the decision to operate. We as a country can do better to detect and treat this disease cost effectively for all appropriate patients including women and elderly individuals,” he said.

Dr. Schermerhorn noted that overall the recommendations are reasonable, but he expressed concern for three populations excluded from the guidelines that warrant additional consideration: nonsmokers with equivalent risk factors, patients older than 75 years, and women. “In the meantime, we should work to ensure that patients determined appropriate by the USPSTF are actually screened,” he said.

The USPSTF is supported by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose. Dr. Schermerhorn disclosed relationships with Abbott, Cook Medical, Endologix, Medtronic, and Philips.

SOURCE: Guirguis-Blake JM et al. JAMA. 2019. doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.17021.
 

Men aged 65-75 years with a history of smoking should undergo one-time screening for abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA), but clinicians can selectively screen men in this age group who don’t smoke, according to updated recommendations from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force published in JAMA.

The task force issued a B recommendation for screening men aged 65-75 years with a smoking history and a C recommendation for selectively screening male never smokers in this age group in an update to the previous recommendations issued in 2014.

The task force also recommended against screening for AAA in women with no history of smoking (D recommendation) and cited insufficient evidence to make recommendations about AAA screening for women with a history of smoking or a family history of AAA (I statement).

The current prevalence of AAA in the United States is unclear because of the low rate of screening, but data from countries including the United Kingdom, Sweden, Denmark, and New Zealand have shown a decline in AAA among screened men aged 65 years and older, according to the USPSTF report.

Risk factors for AAA include smoking, male gender, older age, and having a first-degree relative with AAA, the task force noted.

In an evidence review accompanying the recommendations, Janelle M. Guirguis-Blake, MD, of the University of Washington, Tacoma, and colleagues analyzed data from 33 studies. They found a significant reduction in AAA-related mortality over 12-15 years’ follow-up among men aged 65 years and older who underwent AAA screening, compared with unscreened controls (odds ratio, 0.65). In addition, the risk of ruptures related to AAA was significantly lower over 12-15 years among men who underwent screening, compared with unscreened controls (OR, 0.62). However, no significant difference was noted in all-cause mortality over 12-15 years between screened and unscreened groups (relative risk, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.98-1.00).

Data from four studies of early surgery to treat small aneurysms showed no significant difference in AAA-related mortality or all-cause mortality.

“Screening for AAA entails a simple, noninvasive, and focused ultrasonography examination that costs roughly $50. The only potential harms are the psychologic burden of knowing of the presence of an aneurysm and the risk of elective surgery,” wrote Marc Schermerhorn, MD, of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, in an accompanying editorial published in JAMA Surgery (doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2019.5234).

“The latter can be calculated for each patient, weighed against the risk of rupture, and together with the estimated life expectancy, should be factored into the decision to screen and the decision to operate. We as a country can do better to detect and treat this disease cost effectively for all appropriate patients including women and elderly individuals,” he said.

Dr. Schermerhorn noted that overall the recommendations are reasonable, but he expressed concern for three populations excluded from the guidelines that warrant additional consideration: nonsmokers with equivalent risk factors, patients older than 75 years, and women. “In the meantime, we should work to ensure that patients determined appropriate by the USPSTF are actually screened,” he said.

The USPSTF is supported by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose. Dr. Schermerhorn disclosed relationships with Abbott, Cook Medical, Endologix, Medtronic, and Philips.

SOURCE: Guirguis-Blake JM et al. JAMA. 2019. doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.17021.
 

CHICAGO – Outcomes with fenestrated endografts and endograft anchors to repair abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) in the region of the renal artery have improved as the techniques have gained popularity in recent years, but open repair may still achieve better overall results, vascular surgeons on opposite sides of the controversy contended during a debate at the annual meeting of the Midwestern Vascular Surgery Society.

D.G.S.V.D. Gajasinghe/Wikimedia Commons/GNU Free Documentation License

Fenestrated endovascular aortic repair (FEVAR) “is as safe as open surgery to treat complex aneurysm,” said Carlos Bechara, MD, of Loyola University Medical Center in Chicago. “EndoAnchors [Medtronic] do provide an excellent off-the-shelf solution to treat short, hostile necks with promising short-term results.”

Arguing for open repair was Paul DiMusto, MD, of the University of Wisconsin–Madison. “Open repair has an equal perioperative mortality to FEVAR,” Dr. DiMusto said, adding that the open approach also has a higher long-term branch patency rate, lower secondary-intervention rate, a lower incidence of long-term renal failure, and higher long-term survival. “So putting that all together, open repair is best,” he said.

They staked out their positions by citing a host of published trials.

“The presence of a short neck can create a challenging clinical scenario for an endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm,” Dr. Bechara said. However, he noted he was discussing complex aneurysm in which the aortic clamp is placed above the renal arteries, differentiating it from infrarenal AAA in which the clamp is below the renal arteries with no renal ischemia time. He noted a 2011 study that determined a short neck was a predictor of Type 1A endoleak after AAA repair, but that compliance with best practices at the time was poor; more than 44% of EVARs did not follow the manufacturer’s instruction (Circulation. 2011;123:2848-55).

But FEVAR was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2012, with an indication for an infrarenal neck length of 4-14 mm, Dr. Bechara noted. Since then, several studies have reported excellent outcomes with the technique. An early small study of 67 patients reported a 100% technical success rate with one patient having a Type 1 endoleak at 3 years (J Vasc Surg. 2014;60:1420-8).

This year, a larger study evaluated 6,825 patients in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program who had FEVAR, open AAA repair or standard infrarenal endovascular repair during 2012-2016. “Actually, the fenestrated approach had fewer complications than open repair and the outcomes were comparable to standard EVAR,” Dr. Bechara noted. The trial reported FEVAR had lower rates of perioperative mortality (1.8% vs. 8.8%; P = .001), postoperative renal dysfunction (1.4% vs. 7.7%; P = .002), and overall complications (11% vs. 33%; P less than.001) than did open repair (J Vasc Surg. 2019;69:1670-78).

In regard to the use of endograft anchors for treatment of endoleaks, migrating grafts, and high-risk seal zones, Dr. Bechara noted they are a good “off-the-shelf” choice for complex AAA repair. He cited current results of a cohort of 70 patients with short-neck AAA (J Vasc Surg. 2019;70:732-40). “This study showed a procedural success rate at 97% and a technical success rate at 88.6%,” he said. “They had no stent migration, no increase in sac size or AAA rupture or open conversion.”

He also pointed to just-published results from a randomized trial of 881 patients with up to 14 years of follow-up that found comparable rates of death/secondary procedures, as well as durability, between patients who had endovascular and open repairs (77.7% and 75.5%, respectively, N Engl J Med. 2019;380:2126-35). Also, he noted that hospital volume is an important predictor of success with open repair, with high-volume centers reporting lower mortality (3.9%) than low-volume centers (9%; Ann Surg. 2018 Nov 29. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002873). “So not many centers are doing high-volume open aortic surgery,” he said.

To make his case that open surgery for juxtarenal AAAs is superior, Dr. DiMusto cited a number of recent studies, including a three-center trial of 200 patients who had open and FEVAR procedures (J Endovasc Ther. 2019;26:105-12). “There was no difference in perioperative mortality [2.2% for FEVAR, 1.9% in open repair], ” Dr. DiMusto said “There was a higher freedom from reintervention in the open group [96% vs. 78%], and there was higher long-term vessel patency in the open group” (97.5% having target patency for open vs. 93.3% for FEVAR).

He also pointed to a meta-analysis of 2,326 patients that found similar outcomes for mortality and postoperative renal insufficiency between FEVAR and open repair, around 4.1%, but showed significantly higher rates of renal failure in FEVAR, at 19.7% versus 7.7% (J Vasc Surg. 2015;61:242-55). This study also reported significantly more secondary interventions with FEVAR, 12.7% vs. 4.9%, Dr. DiMusto said.

Another study of 3,253 complex AAA repairs, including 887 FEVAR and 2,125 open procedures, showed that FEVAR had a technical success rate of 97%, with no appreciable difference in perioperative mortality between the two procedures (Ann Surg. 2019 Feb 1. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000003094).

However, Dr. DiMusto said, adjusted 3-year mortality in this study was higher with FEVAR, and further analysis yielded outcomes that favored open repair. “After excluding perioperative deaths, differences remained, with 9% mortality for FEVAR and 5% for open repair [P = .02],” he said. “This corresponded to a 66% higher risk for overall mortality following FEVAR.”

What’s more, Dr. DiMusto said, draft guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence in the United Kingdom advise against offering complex EVAR to people with an unruptured AAA under two scenarios: if open surgery is an option; and even if they’re unable to have surgery because of anesthetic or medical issues. The final guidelines have yet to be released.

Dr. Bechara disclosed financial relationships with Gore Medical and Cook Medical and equity interest in MOKITA Medical. Dr. DiMusto has no relevant financial disclosures.

CHICAGO – Outcomes with fenestrated endografts and endograft anchors to repair abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) in the region of the renal artery have improved as the techniques have gained popularity in recent years, but open repair may still achieve better overall results, vascular surgeons on opposite sides of the controversy contended during a debate at the annual meeting of the Midwestern Vascular Surgery Society.

D.G.S.V.D. Gajasinghe/Wikimedia Commons/GNU Free Documentation License

Fenestrated endovascular aortic repair (FEVAR) “is as safe as open surgery to treat complex aneurysm,” said Carlos Bechara, MD, of Loyola University Medical Center in Chicago. “EndoAnchors [Medtronic] do provide an excellent off-the-shelf solution to treat short, hostile necks with promising short-term results.”

Arguing for open repair was Paul DiMusto, MD, of the University of Wisconsin–Madison. “Open repair has an equal perioperative mortality to FEVAR,” Dr. DiMusto said, adding that the open approach also has a higher long-term branch patency rate, lower secondary-intervention rate, a lower incidence of long-term renal failure, and higher long-term survival. “So putting that all together, open repair is best,” he said.

They staked out their positions by citing a host of published trials.

“The presence of a short neck can create a challenging clinical scenario for an endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm,” Dr. Bechara said. However, he noted he was discussing complex aneurysm in which the aortic clamp is placed above the renal arteries, differentiating it from infrarenal AAA in which the clamp is below the renal arteries with no renal ischemia time. He noted a 2011 study that determined a short neck was a predictor of Type 1A endoleak after AAA repair, but that compliance with best practices at the time was poor; more than 44% of EVARs did not follow the manufacturer’s instruction (Circulation. 2011;123:2848-55).

But FEVAR was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2012, with an indication for an infrarenal neck length of 4-14 mm, Dr. Bechara noted. Since then, several studies have reported excellent outcomes with the technique. An early small study of 67 patients reported a 100% technical success rate with one patient having a Type 1 endoleak at 3 years (J Vasc Surg. 2014;60:1420-8).

This year, a larger study evaluated 6,825 patients in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program who had FEVAR, open AAA repair or standard infrarenal endovascular repair during 2012-2016. “Actually, the fenestrated approach had fewer complications than open repair and the outcomes were comparable to standard EVAR,” Dr. Bechara noted. The trial reported FEVAR had lower rates of perioperative mortality (1.8% vs. 8.8%; P = .001), postoperative renal dysfunction (1.4% vs. 7.7%; P = .002), and overall complications (11% vs. 33%; P less than.001) than did open repair (J Vasc Surg. 2019;69:1670-78).

In regard to the use of endograft anchors for treatment of endoleaks, migrating grafts, and high-risk seal zones, Dr. Bechara noted they are a good “off-the-shelf” choice for complex AAA repair. He cited current results of a cohort of 70 patients with short-neck AAA (J Vasc Surg. 2019;70:732-40). “This study showed a procedural success rate at 97% and a technical success rate at 88.6%,” he said. “They had no stent migration, no increase in sac size or AAA rupture or open conversion.”

He also pointed to just-published results from a randomized trial of 881 patients with up to 14 years of follow-up that found comparable rates of death/secondary procedures, as well as durability, between patients who had endovascular and open repairs (77.7% and 75.5%, respectively, N Engl J Med. 2019;380:2126-35). Also, he noted that hospital volume is an important predictor of success with open repair, with high-volume centers reporting lower mortality (3.9%) than low-volume centers (9%; Ann Surg. 2018 Nov 29. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002873). “So not many centers are doing high-volume open aortic surgery,” he said.

To make his case that open surgery for juxtarenal AAAs is superior, Dr. DiMusto cited a number of recent studies, including a three-center trial of 200 patients who had open and FEVAR procedures (J Endovasc Ther. 2019;26:105-12). “There was no difference in perioperative mortality [2.2% for FEVAR, 1.9% in open repair], ” Dr. DiMusto said “There was a higher freedom from reintervention in the open group [96% vs. 78%], and there was higher long-term vessel patency in the open group” (97.5% having target patency for open vs. 93.3% for FEVAR).

He also pointed to a meta-analysis of 2,326 patients that found similar outcomes for mortality and postoperative renal insufficiency between FEVAR and open repair, around 4.1%, but showed significantly higher rates of renal failure in FEVAR, at 19.7% versus 7.7% (J Vasc Surg. 2015;61:242-55). This study also reported significantly more secondary interventions with FEVAR, 12.7% vs. 4.9%, Dr. DiMusto said.

Another study of 3,253 complex AAA repairs, including 887 FEVAR and 2,125 open procedures, showed that FEVAR had a technical success rate of 97%, with no appreciable difference in perioperative mortality between the two procedures (Ann Surg. 2019 Feb 1. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000003094).

However, Dr. DiMusto said, adjusted 3-year mortality in this study was higher with FEVAR, and further analysis yielded outcomes that favored open repair. “After excluding perioperative deaths, differences remained, with 9% mortality for FEVAR and 5% for open repair [P = .02],” he said. “This corresponded to a 66% higher risk for overall mortality following FEVAR.”

What’s more, Dr. DiMusto said, draft guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence in the United Kingdom advise against offering complex EVAR to people with an unruptured AAA under two scenarios: if open surgery is an option; and even if they’re unable to have surgery because of anesthetic or medical issues. The final guidelines have yet to be released.

Dr. Bechara disclosed financial relationships with Gore Medical and Cook Medical and equity interest in MOKITA Medical. Dr. DiMusto has no relevant financial disclosures.

CHICAGO – Outcomes with fenestrated endografts and endograft anchors to repair abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) in the region of the renal artery have improved as the techniques have gained popularity in recent years, but open repair may still achieve better overall results, vascular surgeons on opposite sides of the controversy contended during a debate at the annual meeting of the Midwestern Vascular Surgery Society.

D.G.S.V.D. Gajasinghe/Wikimedia Commons/GNU Free Documentation License

Fenestrated endovascular aortic repair (FEVAR) “is as safe as open surgery to treat complex aneurysm,” said Carlos Bechara, MD, of Loyola University Medical Center in Chicago. “EndoAnchors [Medtronic] do provide an excellent off-the-shelf solution to treat short, hostile necks with promising short-term results.”

Arguing for open repair was Paul DiMusto, MD, of the University of Wisconsin–Madison. “Open repair has an equal perioperative mortality to FEVAR,” Dr. DiMusto said, adding that the open approach also has a higher long-term branch patency rate, lower secondary-intervention rate, a lower incidence of long-term renal failure, and higher long-term survival. “So putting that all together, open repair is best,” he said.

They staked out their positions by citing a host of published trials.

“The presence of a short neck can create a challenging clinical scenario for an endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm,” Dr. Bechara said. However, he noted he was discussing complex aneurysm in which the aortic clamp is placed above the renal arteries, differentiating it from infrarenal AAA in which the clamp is below the renal arteries with no renal ischemia time. He noted a 2011 study that determined a short neck was a predictor of Type 1A endoleak after AAA repair, but that compliance with best practices at the time was poor; more than 44% of EVARs did not follow the manufacturer’s instruction (Circulation. 2011;123:2848-55).

But FEVAR was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2012, with an indication for an infrarenal neck length of 4-14 mm, Dr. Bechara noted. Since then, several studies have reported excellent outcomes with the technique. An early small study of 67 patients reported a 100% technical success rate with one patient having a Type 1 endoleak at 3 years (J Vasc Surg. 2014;60:1420-8).

This year, a larger study evaluated 6,825 patients in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program who had FEVAR, open AAA repair or standard infrarenal endovascular repair during 2012-2016. “Actually, the fenestrated approach had fewer complications than open repair and the outcomes were comparable to standard EVAR,” Dr. Bechara noted. The trial reported FEVAR had lower rates of perioperative mortality (1.8% vs. 8.8%; P = .001), postoperative renal dysfunction (1.4% vs. 7.7%; P = .002), and overall complications (11% vs. 33%; P less than.001) than did open repair (J Vasc Surg. 2019;69:1670-78).

In regard to the use of endograft anchors for treatment of endoleaks, migrating grafts, and high-risk seal zones, Dr. Bechara noted they are a good “off-the-shelf” choice for complex AAA repair. He cited current results of a cohort of 70 patients with short-neck AAA (J Vasc Surg. 2019;70:732-40). “This study showed a procedural success rate at 97% and a technical success rate at 88.6%,” he said. “They had no stent migration, no increase in sac size or AAA rupture or open conversion.”

He also pointed to just-published results from a randomized trial of 881 patients with up to 14 years of follow-up that found comparable rates of death/secondary procedures, as well as durability, between patients who had endovascular and open repairs (77.7% and 75.5%, respectively, N Engl J Med. 2019;380:2126-35). Also, he noted that hospital volume is an important predictor of success with open repair, with high-volume centers reporting lower mortality (3.9%) than low-volume centers (9%; Ann Surg. 2018 Nov 29. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002873). “So not many centers are doing high-volume open aortic surgery,” he said.

To make his case that open surgery for juxtarenal AAAs is superior, Dr. DiMusto cited a number of recent studies, including a three-center trial of 200 patients who had open and FEVAR procedures (J Endovasc Ther. 2019;26:105-12). “There was no difference in perioperative mortality [2.2% for FEVAR, 1.9% in open repair], ” Dr. DiMusto said “There was a higher freedom from reintervention in the open group [96% vs. 78%], and there was higher long-term vessel patency in the open group” (97.5% having target patency for open vs. 93.3% for FEVAR).

He also pointed to a meta-analysis of 2,326 patients that found similar outcomes for mortality and postoperative renal insufficiency between FEVAR and open repair, around 4.1%, but showed significantly higher rates of renal failure in FEVAR, at 19.7% versus 7.7% (J Vasc Surg. 2015;61:242-55). This study also reported significantly more secondary interventions with FEVAR, 12.7% vs. 4.9%, Dr. DiMusto said.

Another study of 3,253 complex AAA repairs, including 887 FEVAR and 2,125 open procedures, showed that FEVAR had a technical success rate of 97%, with no appreciable difference in perioperative mortality between the two procedures (Ann Surg. 2019 Feb 1. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000003094).

However, Dr. DiMusto said, adjusted 3-year mortality in this study was higher with FEVAR, and further analysis yielded outcomes that favored open repair. “After excluding perioperative deaths, differences remained, with 9% mortality for FEVAR and 5% for open repair [P = .02],” he said. “This corresponded to a 66% higher risk for overall mortality following FEVAR.”

What’s more, Dr. DiMusto said, draft guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence in the United Kingdom advise against offering complex EVAR to people with an unruptured AAA under two scenarios: if open surgery is an option; and even if they’re unable to have surgery because of anesthetic or medical issues. The final guidelines have yet to be released.

Dr. Bechara disclosed financial relationships with Gore Medical and Cook Medical and equity interest in MOKITA Medical. Dr. DiMusto has no relevant financial disclosures.

CHICAGO – Although advanced renal dysfunction is a major contraindication for open repair of complex thoracoabdominal aneurysms (TAAA) and pararenal aneurysms (PRA), a single-center study of patients who had branched-fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (B-FEVAR) found that those with severe or moderate dysfunction and those with normal kidney function had similar results, according to a study reported at the annual meeting of the Midwestern Vascular Surgery Society.

“In our series of patients with stage 4 and 5 chronic kidney disease, branched-fenestration aneurysm repair for pararenal and thoracoabdominal aneurysm was associated with acceptable morbidity and mortality,” said Luis C. Cajas-Monson, MD, of the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn. “Although often a contraindication for open repair, B-FEVAR could be a safe alternative for TAAA patients with poor renal function.”

The study evaluated 231 patients who had B-FEVAR for the following etiologies: 80 for PRA; 89 for Type I to III TAAA; and 62 for type IV TAAA. The patients had at least 1 year of follow-up. A small percentage of patients (4%; n = 9) had stage IV or V chronic kidney disease; the remainder had stage I to III CKD. The study compared results in the lower- and higher-stage CKD groups.

“The frequency of endovascular aortic aneurysm repair continues to increase, and it has advanced to treating more complex aortic pathology,” Dr. Cajas-Monson said. “There appears to be no significant decline in renal function with complex EVAR.” He noted that in open TAAA repair, the more severe the chronic kidney disease state, the worse the outcomes.

The Mayo researchers set out to evaluate the impact of renal function on survival after B-FEVAR for TAAA and PRA. “We hypothesized that renal function is not a significant factor in early and late survival after B-FEVAR,” Dr. Cajas-Monson said. TAAA patients represented 65% of the study population, with 59% having Extent I to III and 41% having Extent IV disease.

Dr. Cajas-Monson noted that demographics were comparable between the higher- and lower-stage CKD groups, with the exception of higher baseline creatinine levels in the CKD 4/5 patients: 3.14 vs. 1.13 (P less than .001). Operative outcomes and length of stay were also similar.

The higher-stage group had a higher overall rate of major adverse events, but given the small sample size this was not found to be significantly different (44% vs. 29%; P = .26). However, there were no events of perioperative death, stroke, paraplegia or estimated blood loss greater than 1 L in the higher-stage patients, while the lower-stage group had low percentages of these events.

Three-year survival was 84% in the lower-stage group and 75% in the higher-stage group.

Dr. Cajas-Monson acknowledged that the small sample size was a limitation of the study. “Further evaluation of patients with renal dysfunction is needed to validate our initial findings,” he said.

This abstract of this study was published in the Journal of Vascular Surgery (2019. 70 [3]:e67).

Dr. Cajas-Monson had no financial relationships to disclose.

SOURCE: Cajas-Monson LC et al. Midwestern Vascular 2019, Abstract 19.

CHICAGO – Although advanced renal dysfunction is a major contraindication for open repair of complex thoracoabdominal aneurysms (TAAA) and pararenal aneurysms (PRA), a single-center study of patients who had branched-fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (B-FEVAR) found that those with severe or moderate dysfunction and those with normal kidney function had similar results, according to a study reported at the annual meeting of the Midwestern Vascular Surgery Society.

“In our series of patients with stage 4 and 5 chronic kidney disease, branched-fenestration aneurysm repair for pararenal and thoracoabdominal aneurysm was associated with acceptable morbidity and mortality,” said Luis C. Cajas-Monson, MD, of the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn. “Although often a contraindication for open repair, B-FEVAR could be a safe alternative for TAAA patients with poor renal function.”

The study evaluated 231 patients who had B-FEVAR for the following etiologies: 80 for PRA; 89 for Type I to III TAAA; and 62 for type IV TAAA. The patients had at least 1 year of follow-up. A small percentage of patients (4%; n = 9) had stage IV or V chronic kidney disease; the remainder had stage I to III CKD. The study compared results in the lower- and higher-stage CKD groups.

“The frequency of endovascular aortic aneurysm repair continues to increase, and it has advanced to treating more complex aortic pathology,” Dr. Cajas-Monson said. “There appears to be no significant decline in renal function with complex EVAR.” He noted that in open TAAA repair, the more severe the chronic kidney disease state, the worse the outcomes.

The Mayo researchers set out to evaluate the impact of renal function on survival after B-FEVAR for TAAA and PRA. “We hypothesized that renal function is not a significant factor in early and late survival after B-FEVAR,” Dr. Cajas-Monson said. TAAA patients represented 65% of the study population, with 59% having Extent I to III and 41% having Extent IV disease.

Dr. Cajas-Monson noted that demographics were comparable between the higher- and lower-stage CKD groups, with the exception of higher baseline creatinine levels in the CKD 4/5 patients: 3.14 vs. 1.13 (P less than .001). Operative outcomes and length of stay were also similar.

The higher-stage group had a higher overall rate of major adverse events, but given the small sample size this was not found to be significantly different (44% vs. 29%; P = .26). However, there were no events of perioperative death, stroke, paraplegia or estimated blood loss greater than 1 L in the higher-stage patients, while the lower-stage group had low percentages of these events.

Three-year survival was 84% in the lower-stage group and 75% in the higher-stage group.

Dr. Cajas-Monson acknowledged that the small sample size was a limitation of the study. “Further evaluation of patients with renal dysfunction is needed to validate our initial findings,” he said.

This abstract of this study was published in the Journal of Vascular Surgery (2019. 70 [3]:e67).

Dr. Cajas-Monson had no financial relationships to disclose.

SOURCE: Cajas-Monson LC et al. Midwestern Vascular 2019, Abstract 19.

CHICAGO – Although advanced renal dysfunction is a major contraindication for open repair of complex thoracoabdominal aneurysms (TAAA) and pararenal aneurysms (PRA), a single-center study of patients who had branched-fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (B-FEVAR) found that those with severe or moderate dysfunction and those with normal kidney function had similar results, according to a study reported at the annual meeting of the Midwestern Vascular Surgery Society.

“In our series of patients with stage 4 and 5 chronic kidney disease, branched-fenestration aneurysm repair for pararenal and thoracoabdominal aneurysm was associated with acceptable morbidity and mortality,” said Luis C. Cajas-Monson, MD, of the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn. “Although often a contraindication for open repair, B-FEVAR could be a safe alternative for TAAA patients with poor renal function.”

The study evaluated 231 patients who had B-FEVAR for the following etiologies: 80 for PRA; 89 for Type I to III TAAA; and 62 for type IV TAAA. The patients had at least 1 year of follow-up. A small percentage of patients (4%; n = 9) had stage IV or V chronic kidney disease; the remainder had stage I to III CKD. The study compared results in the lower- and higher-stage CKD groups.

“The frequency of endovascular aortic aneurysm repair continues to increase, and it has advanced to treating more complex aortic pathology,” Dr. Cajas-Monson said. “There appears to be no significant decline in renal function with complex EVAR.” He noted that in open TAAA repair, the more severe the chronic kidney disease state, the worse the outcomes.

The Mayo researchers set out to evaluate the impact of renal function on survival after B-FEVAR for TAAA and PRA. “We hypothesized that renal function is not a significant factor in early and late survival after B-FEVAR,” Dr. Cajas-Monson said. TAAA patients represented 65% of the study population, with 59% having Extent I to III and 41% having Extent IV disease.

Dr. Cajas-Monson noted that demographics were comparable between the higher- and lower-stage CKD groups, with the exception of higher baseline creatinine levels in the CKD 4/5 patients: 3.14 vs. 1.13 (P less than .001). Operative outcomes and length of stay were also similar.

The higher-stage group had a higher overall rate of major adverse events, but given the small sample size this was not found to be significantly different (44% vs. 29%; P = .26). However, there were no events of perioperative death, stroke, paraplegia or estimated blood loss greater than 1 L in the higher-stage patients, while the lower-stage group had low percentages of these events.

Three-year survival was 84% in the lower-stage group and 75% in the higher-stage group.

Dr. Cajas-Monson acknowledged that the small sample size was a limitation of the study. “Further evaluation of patients with renal dysfunction is needed to validate our initial findings,” he said.

This abstract of this study was published in the Journal of Vascular Surgery (2019. 70 [3]:e67).

Dr. Cajas-Monson had no financial relationships to disclose.

SOURCE: Cajas-Monson LC et al. Midwestern Vascular 2019, Abstract 19.

CHICAGO – Patients who have one kidney do as well after fenestrated-branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F-BEVAR) of pararenal or thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm as patients with both kidneys, according to a study of almost 300 patients presented at the annual meeting of the Midwestern Vascular Surgery Society.

“Despite the worse baseline renal function associated with single functioning kidney patients, F-BEVAR is safe and effective with nearly identical outcomes in patients with a SFK [single functioning kidney] as compared to patients with two functioning kidneys,” said Keouna Pather of Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.

The study evaluated 287 F-BEVAR patients enrolled in a physician-sponsored investigation device exemption study from November 2013 to October 2018. Thirty of those patients had one kidney, the remaining 257 were the control group. Ms. Pather noted that characteristics were similar between both patient groups with the exception that SFK patients were younger (age 70 vs. 74 years; P = .009) and had larger renal artery diameter (6 vs. 5.7 mm; P = .05). “Patients with a SFK had enlargement of their renal artery in a compensatory fashion,” she said.

Survival at 2 years was 92% for SFK patients and 84% for controls.

“The SFK patients did start at a worse baseline of CKD [chronic kidney disease] stages as compared to controls,” she noted. In the SFK group, 63% (n = 19) had Stage III CKD versus 40% (n = 104) of controls (P = .02). Likewise, rates of Stage IV CKD were 10% (n = 3) and 2% (n = 4), respectively (P = .03).

In terms of outcomes, two patients in the control group died within 30 days but none in the SFK group did, Ms. Pather said. Also, a higher percentage of SFK patients had estimated blood loss greater than 1 L, compared with controls (20% vs. 7%; P = .02). All other outcomes, including rates of acute kidney injury (20% vs. 12%; P = .26), were not statistically different, she said.

“Between the groups, there was no significant difference in CKD progression that needed stenting,” she added, with 27% (n = 8) and 26% (n = 67) of the SFK and controls progressing to CKD Stages III to V.

The study also identified predictors of acute kidney injury in SFK patients: total fluoroscopy time (hours), which raised the risk by 78.5%, and estimated blood loss greater than 1 L, which increased risk by 109%.

Predictors of renal function deterioration in SFK patients were renal artery occlusion or reintervention for branch stenosis or kink, which raised the risk threefold; a Crawford extent II, which more than doubled the risk; and acute kidney injury, which raised chances almost fivefold. “Development of postoperative AKI [acute kidney injury] is the most important predictor for renal function deterioration,” Pather said.

When freedom from renal function deterioration at 2 years was compared between the two groups, again the results were similar because of the small sample size of the SFK group: 100% for the SFK group and 84% for controls.

Ms. Pather had no financial relationships to disclose.

CHICAGO – Patients who have one kidney do as well after fenestrated-branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F-BEVAR) of pararenal or thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm as patients with both kidneys, according to a study of almost 300 patients presented at the annual meeting of the Midwestern Vascular Surgery Society.

“Despite the worse baseline renal function associated with single functioning kidney patients, F-BEVAR is safe and effective with nearly identical outcomes in patients with a SFK [single functioning kidney] as compared to patients with two functioning kidneys,” said Keouna Pather of Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.

The study evaluated 287 F-BEVAR patients enrolled in a physician-sponsored investigation device exemption study from November 2013 to October 2018. Thirty of those patients had one kidney, the remaining 257 were the control group. Ms. Pather noted that characteristics were similar between both patient groups with the exception that SFK patients were younger (age 70 vs. 74 years; P = .009) and had larger renal artery diameter (6 vs. 5.7 mm; P = .05). “Patients with a SFK had enlargement of their renal artery in a compensatory fashion,” she said.

Survival at 2 years was 92% for SFK patients and 84% for controls.

“The SFK patients did start at a worse baseline of CKD [chronic kidney disease] stages as compared to controls,” she noted. In the SFK group, 63% (n = 19) had Stage III CKD versus 40% (n = 104) of controls (P = .02). Likewise, rates of Stage IV CKD were 10% (n = 3) and 2% (n = 4), respectively (P = .03).

In terms of outcomes, two patients in the control group died within 30 days but none in the SFK group did, Ms. Pather said. Also, a higher percentage of SFK patients had estimated blood loss greater than 1 L, compared with controls (20% vs. 7%; P = .02). All other outcomes, including rates of acute kidney injury (20% vs. 12%; P = .26), were not statistically different, she said.

“Between the groups, there was no significant difference in CKD progression that needed stenting,” she added, with 27% (n = 8) and 26% (n = 67) of the SFK and controls progressing to CKD Stages III to V.

The study also identified predictors of acute kidney injury in SFK patients: total fluoroscopy time (hours), which raised the risk by 78.5%, and estimated blood loss greater than 1 L, which increased risk by 109%.

Predictors of renal function deterioration in SFK patients were renal artery occlusion or reintervention for branch stenosis or kink, which raised the risk threefold; a Crawford extent II, which more than doubled the risk; and acute kidney injury, which raised chances almost fivefold. “Development of postoperative AKI [acute kidney injury] is the most important predictor for renal function deterioration,” Pather said.

When freedom from renal function deterioration at 2 years was compared between the two groups, again the results were similar because of the small sample size of the SFK group: 100% for the SFK group and 84% for controls.

Ms. Pather had no financial relationships to disclose.

CHICAGO – Patients who have one kidney do as well after fenestrated-branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F-BEVAR) of pararenal or thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm as patients with both kidneys, according to a study of almost 300 patients presented at the annual meeting of the Midwestern Vascular Surgery Society.

“Despite the worse baseline renal function associated with single functioning kidney patients, F-BEVAR is safe and effective with nearly identical outcomes in patients with a SFK [single functioning kidney] as compared to patients with two functioning kidneys,” said Keouna Pather of Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.

The study evaluated 287 F-BEVAR patients enrolled in a physician-sponsored investigation device exemption study from November 2013 to October 2018. Thirty of those patients had one kidney, the remaining 257 were the control group. Ms. Pather noted that characteristics were similar between both patient groups with the exception that SFK patients were younger (age 70 vs. 74 years; P = .009) and had larger renal artery diameter (6 vs. 5.7 mm; P = .05). “Patients with a SFK had enlargement of their renal artery in a compensatory fashion,” she said.

Survival at 2 years was 92% for SFK patients and 84% for controls.

“The SFK patients did start at a worse baseline of CKD [chronic kidney disease] stages as compared to controls,” she noted. In the SFK group, 63% (n = 19) had Stage III CKD versus 40% (n = 104) of controls (P = .02). Likewise, rates of Stage IV CKD were 10% (n = 3) and 2% (n = 4), respectively (P = .03).

In terms of outcomes, two patients in the control group died within 30 days but none in the SFK group did, Ms. Pather said. Also, a higher percentage of SFK patients had estimated blood loss greater than 1 L, compared with controls (20% vs. 7%; P = .02). All other outcomes, including rates of acute kidney injury (20% vs. 12%; P = .26), were not statistically different, she said.

“Between the groups, there was no significant difference in CKD progression that needed stenting,” she added, with 27% (n = 8) and 26% (n = 67) of the SFK and controls progressing to CKD Stages III to V.

The study also identified predictors of acute kidney injury in SFK patients: total fluoroscopy time (hours), which raised the risk by 78.5%, and estimated blood loss greater than 1 L, which increased risk by 109%.

Predictors of renal function deterioration in SFK patients were renal artery occlusion or reintervention for branch stenosis or kink, which raised the risk threefold; a Crawford extent II, which more than doubled the risk; and acute kidney injury, which raised chances almost fivefold. “Development of postoperative AKI [acute kidney injury] is the most important predictor for renal function deterioration,” Pather said.

When freedom from renal function deterioration at 2 years was compared between the two groups, again the results were similar because of the small sample size of the SFK group: 100% for the SFK group and 84% for controls.

Ms. Pather had no financial relationships to disclose.

CHICAGO – The need for additional intervention after repair of the ascending aorta in extended type A aortic dissection has been thought to follow the practice for type B dissection and favor preemptive thoracic endovascular aortic repair. However, preemptive TEVAR may, at least in the midterm, provide no benefit in patients with extended type A dissections, according to results reported at the annual meeting of the Midwestern Vascular Surgery Society.

DAJ/Thinkstock

“TEVAR does not appear to be indicated in patients with extended type A dissections after acute aortic repair,” said Amy B. Reed, MD, of the University of Minnesota.

The study’s hypothesis was that growth rates of dissection and the need for additional intervention in the descending thoracic aorta are similar between extended type A (ExTA) and type B aortic dissection after initial repair of the ascending aorta. Dr. Reed noted that investigators from the INSTEAD-XL trial reported that preemptive TEVAR improved outcomes in patients with type B dissections (Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6:407-16). “The thinking has been that patients with uncomplicated ExTA would also benefit from early TEVAR,” Dr. Reed said.

The study evaluated 87 consecutive patients from 2011 to 2018, 43 with ExTA and 44 with type B dissections. Characteristics of both groups were similar, except the type B group had a significantly higher rate of coronary artery disease, 16% vs. 0% (P = .01). The distal extent of the dissection was beyond the aortic bifurcation in 75% of the ExTA patients and 52% of the type B group, “so we felt that these groups were really well matched,” Dr. Reed said.

Of the 43 ExTA patients, five had repair and 38 had no intervention. At an average follow-up of 33 months, 23 of the no-intervention patients showed no growth of their dissection, Dr. Reed said. In the type B group, 15 had no repair, and of those nine showed no growth (one patient died early and five did show growth).

“When we look at intervention-free survival, there’s a significant difference between our ExTA patients vs. our type B patients over time, with significantly more type B patients requiring intervention,” she said. At 28 months, 88% of ExTA were intervention free, whereas at 9 months 35% of type B patients were.

“We feel that, following the repair of ascending acute aortic dissection, in those patients with ExTA dissections, there does appear to be a slow progression of distal aortic disease,” Dr. Reed said. “Rarely do these patients develop complications such as dissection needing intervention either in the acute hospital period or delayed.”

Because the findings are based on medium-term follow-up, she said, “We certainly need further follow-up to confirm these midterm findings.”

Dr. Reed had no relevant financial relationships to disclose.

CHICAGO – The need for additional intervention after repair of the ascending aorta in extended type A aortic dissection has been thought to follow the practice for type B dissection and favor preemptive thoracic endovascular aortic repair. However, preemptive TEVAR may, at least in the midterm, provide no benefit in patients with extended type A dissections, according to results reported at the annual meeting of the Midwestern Vascular Surgery Society.

DAJ/Thinkstock

“TEVAR does not appear to be indicated in patients with extended type A dissections after acute aortic repair,” said Amy B. Reed, MD, of the University of Minnesota.

The study’s hypothesis was that growth rates of dissection and the need for additional intervention in the descending thoracic aorta are similar between extended type A (ExTA) and type B aortic dissection after initial repair of the ascending aorta. Dr. Reed noted that investigators from the INSTEAD-XL trial reported that preemptive TEVAR improved outcomes in patients with type B dissections (Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6:407-16). “The thinking has been that patients with uncomplicated ExTA would also benefit from early TEVAR,” Dr. Reed said.

The study evaluated 87 consecutive patients from 2011 to 2018, 43 with ExTA and 44 with type B dissections. Characteristics of both groups were similar, except the type B group had a significantly higher rate of coronary artery disease, 16% vs. 0% (P = .01). The distal extent of the dissection was beyond the aortic bifurcation in 75% of the ExTA patients and 52% of the type B group, “so we felt that these groups were really well matched,” Dr. Reed said.

Of the 43 ExTA patients, five had repair and 38 had no intervention. At an average follow-up of 33 months, 23 of the no-intervention patients showed no growth of their dissection, Dr. Reed said. In the type B group, 15 had no repair, and of those nine showed no growth (one patient died early and five did show growth).

“When we look at intervention-free survival, there’s a significant difference between our ExTA patients vs. our type B patients over time, with significantly more type B patients requiring intervention,” she said. At 28 months, 88% of ExTA were intervention free, whereas at 9 months 35% of type B patients were.

“We feel that, following the repair of ascending acute aortic dissection, in those patients with ExTA dissections, there does appear to be a slow progression of distal aortic disease,” Dr. Reed said. “Rarely do these patients develop complications such as dissection needing intervention either in the acute hospital period or delayed.”

Because the findings are based on medium-term follow-up, she said, “We certainly need further follow-up to confirm these midterm findings.”

Dr. Reed had no relevant financial relationships to disclose.

CHICAGO – The need for additional intervention after repair of the ascending aorta in extended type A aortic dissection has been thought to follow the practice for type B dissection and favor preemptive thoracic endovascular aortic repair. However, preemptive TEVAR may, at least in the midterm, provide no benefit in patients with extended type A dissections, according to results reported at the annual meeting of the Midwestern Vascular Surgery Society.

DAJ/Thinkstock

“TEVAR does not appear to be indicated in patients with extended type A dissections after acute aortic repair,” said Amy B. Reed, MD, of the University of Minnesota.

The study’s hypothesis was that growth rates of dissection and the need for additional intervention in the descending thoracic aorta are similar between extended type A (ExTA) and type B aortic dissection after initial repair of the ascending aorta. Dr. Reed noted that investigators from the INSTEAD-XL trial reported that preemptive TEVAR improved outcomes in patients with type B dissections (Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6:407-16). “The thinking has been that patients with uncomplicated ExTA would also benefit from early TEVAR,” Dr. Reed said.

The study evaluated 87 consecutive patients from 2011 to 2018, 43 with ExTA and 44 with type B dissections. Characteristics of both groups were similar, except the type B group had a significantly higher rate of coronary artery disease, 16% vs. 0% (P = .01). The distal extent of the dissection was beyond the aortic bifurcation in 75% of the ExTA patients and 52% of the type B group, “so we felt that these groups were really well matched,” Dr. Reed said.

Of the 43 ExTA patients, five had repair and 38 had no intervention. At an average follow-up of 33 months, 23 of the no-intervention patients showed no growth of their dissection, Dr. Reed said. In the type B group, 15 had no repair, and of those nine showed no growth (one patient died early and five did show growth).

“When we look at intervention-free survival, there’s a significant difference between our ExTA patients vs. our type B patients over time, with significantly more type B patients requiring intervention,” she said. At 28 months, 88% of ExTA were intervention free, whereas at 9 months 35% of type B patients were.

“We feel that, following the repair of ascending acute aortic dissection, in those patients with ExTA dissections, there does appear to be a slow progression of distal aortic disease,” Dr. Reed said. “Rarely do these patients develop complications such as dissection needing intervention either in the acute hospital period or delayed.”

Because the findings are based on medium-term follow-up, she said, “We certainly need further follow-up to confirm these midterm findings.”

Dr. Reed had no relevant financial relationships to disclose.

CHICAGO – Early results of a trial evaluating allogeneic mesenchymal stem cells to target aortic inflammation in patients with small abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) has reported encouraging early results, according to research presented here at the annual meeting of the Midwestern Vascular Surgery Society.

Katherin Leckie, MD, an integrated vascular surgery resident in the vascular surgery division, Indiana University, Indianapolis, reported on early results from the ARREST (Aneurysm Repression With Mesenchymal Stem Cells) trial. Twenty-one patients have been enrolled so far, and early results showed that treatment with mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) increased levels of a key anti-inflammatory cell type, the Tr1, in proportion to a key proinflammatory cell type, the Th17.

“In AAA, the Tr1:Th17 ratio is decreased,” Dr. Leckie said. AAA serum stimulates MSC secretion of IL-10. Previously, mouse studies have shown MSCs restore the Tr1:Th17 balance and prevent aneurysms, Dr. Leckie noted.

The ARREST trial is evaluating that finding in humans with small AAAs of 35-50 mm in diameter. When the trial is fully enrolled, the 36 patients are to be evenly divided between three treatment groups: placebo; 1 million MSC/kg; and 3 million MSC/kg. The primary endpoint is change in Tr1:Th17 ratio at 14 days. Secondary endpoints are change in AAA inflammation at 2 weeks and change in AAA diameter and volume at 1-5 years.

At 14 days, the high-dose group had already seen a more than 100% change in Tr1:Th17 ratio (P = .03), versus about a 35% change for the low-dose and no change for the placebo groups. At 28 days, the high-dose group’s change increased to greater than 150%, while that of the low-dose group reached around 50%, with no change in the placebo group.

The study also found a possible trend toward changes in AAA diameter among the three groups after 1 year, Dr. Leckie said. In the placebo group, AAA diameter increased 3.5 mm on average. In the low-dose group, AAA diameter increased almost 1.5 mm. However, in the high-dose group, aortic diameter actually decreased about 0.5 mm (P = .189), Dr. Leckie said.

“MSCs have significantly improved the Tr1:Th17 imbalance at 14 days,” Dr. Leckie said. “There’s also a possible trend toward decreased aortic inflammation at 14 days as well as decreased growth of AAA at 12 months.”

Dr. Leckie had no relevant financial relationships to disclose.

CHICAGO – Early results of a trial evaluating allogeneic mesenchymal stem cells to target aortic inflammation in patients with small abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) has reported encouraging early results, according to research presented here at the annual meeting of the Midwestern Vascular Surgery Society.

Katherin Leckie, MD, an integrated vascular surgery resident in the vascular surgery division, Indiana University, Indianapolis, reported on early results from the ARREST (Aneurysm Repression With Mesenchymal Stem Cells) trial. Twenty-one patients have been enrolled so far, and early results showed that treatment with mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) increased levels of a key anti-inflammatory cell type, the Tr1, in proportion to a key proinflammatory cell type, the Th17.

“In AAA, the Tr1:Th17 ratio is decreased,” Dr. Leckie said. AAA serum stimulates MSC secretion of IL-10. Previously, mouse studies have shown MSCs restore the Tr1:Th17 balance and prevent aneurysms, Dr. Leckie noted.

The ARREST trial is evaluating that finding in humans with small AAAs of 35-50 mm in diameter. When the trial is fully enrolled, the 36 patients are to be evenly divided between three treatment groups: placebo; 1 million MSC/kg; and 3 million MSC/kg. The primary endpoint is change in Tr1:Th17 ratio at 14 days. Secondary endpoints are change in AAA inflammation at 2 weeks and change in AAA diameter and volume at 1-5 years.

At 14 days, the high-dose group had already seen a more than 100% change in Tr1:Th17 ratio (P = .03), versus about a 35% change for the low-dose and no change for the placebo groups. At 28 days, the high-dose group’s change increased to greater than 150%, while that of the low-dose group reached around 50%, with no change in the placebo group.

The study also found a possible trend toward changes in AAA diameter among the three groups after 1 year, Dr. Leckie said. In the placebo group, AAA diameter increased 3.5 mm on average. In the low-dose group, AAA diameter increased almost 1.5 mm. However, in the high-dose group, aortic diameter actually decreased about 0.5 mm (P = .189), Dr. Leckie said.

“MSCs have significantly improved the Tr1:Th17 imbalance at 14 days,” Dr. Leckie said. “There’s also a possible trend toward decreased aortic inflammation at 14 days as well as decreased growth of AAA at 12 months.”

Dr. Leckie had no relevant financial relationships to disclose.

CHICAGO – Early results of a trial evaluating allogeneic mesenchymal stem cells to target aortic inflammation in patients with small abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) has reported encouraging early results, according to research presented here at the annual meeting of the Midwestern Vascular Surgery Society.

Katherin Leckie, MD, an integrated vascular surgery resident in the vascular surgery division, Indiana University, Indianapolis, reported on early results from the ARREST (Aneurysm Repression With Mesenchymal Stem Cells) trial. Twenty-one patients have been enrolled so far, and early results showed that treatment with mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) increased levels of a key anti-inflammatory cell type, the Tr1, in proportion to a key proinflammatory cell type, the Th17.

“In AAA, the Tr1:Th17 ratio is decreased,” Dr. Leckie said. AAA serum stimulates MSC secretion of IL-10. Previously, mouse studies have shown MSCs restore the Tr1:Th17 balance and prevent aneurysms, Dr. Leckie noted.

The ARREST trial is evaluating that finding in humans with small AAAs of 35-50 mm in diameter. When the trial is fully enrolled, the 36 patients are to be evenly divided between three treatment groups: placebo; 1 million MSC/kg; and 3 million MSC/kg. The primary endpoint is change in Tr1:Th17 ratio at 14 days. Secondary endpoints are change in AAA inflammation at 2 weeks and change in AAA diameter and volume at 1-5 years.

At 14 days, the high-dose group had already seen a more than 100% change in Tr1:Th17 ratio (P = .03), versus about a 35% change for the low-dose and no change for the placebo groups. At 28 days, the high-dose group’s change increased to greater than 150%, while that of the low-dose group reached around 50%, with no change in the placebo group.

The study also found a possible trend toward changes in AAA diameter among the three groups after 1 year, Dr. Leckie said. In the placebo group, AAA diameter increased 3.5 mm on average. In the low-dose group, AAA diameter increased almost 1.5 mm. However, in the high-dose group, aortic diameter actually decreased about 0.5 mm (P = .189), Dr. Leckie said.

“MSCs have significantly improved the Tr1:Th17 imbalance at 14 days,” Dr. Leckie said. “There’s also a possible trend toward decreased aortic inflammation at 14 days as well as decreased growth of AAA at 12 months.”

Dr. Leckie had no relevant financial relationships to disclose.

CHICAGO – Numerous studies have shown conflicting results for endovascular repair in ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA), but an analysis of 4,000-plus cases from a national registry has found a 41% reduction in mortality with endovascular repair vs. open repair, according to a presentation at the annual meeting of the Midwestern Vascular Surgery Society.

“EVAR is becoming an increasingly popular strategy for treatment of AAA,” said Samer Alharthi, MD, MPH, of the University of Toledo in Ohio. “As surgeon experience and endovascular technology have improved, a greater percentage of ruptured AAA are being treated by EVAR.”

Dr. Alharthi reported on a retrospective analysis of 4,133 patients who had repair for ruptured AAA in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database from 2010 to 2016. Notably, the number of EVAR repairs continue to increase and peaked in 2015, with 53% of ruptured AAA treated by EVAR.

Over the term of the study, the overall mortality rate was 22.6% for EVAR and 33.2% for open repair (P less than .001), Dr. Alharthi said. “After adjusting for cofounders, there was a 41% reduction in the mortality rate with the EVAR approach,” he said.

The only appreciable significant difference in demographics between the two groups was a higher percentage of smokers with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease having open repair – 942 (49.2%) vs. 701 (36.2%) – and a higher percentage of patients with end-stage renal disease having EVAR, Dr. Alharthi said. Other comorbidities had no statistically significant difference.

“Complications – pneumonia, reintubation, and acute renal failure – were higher in the open than the EVAR group,” he said. For example, rates of acute renal failure were 15.4% and 8.2% (P less than.001), respectively. Rates of myocardial infarction were similar between the two groups: 6.3% and 6% (P = .74), respectively.

Dr. Alharthi had no financial relationships to disclose.

SOURCE: Alharthi S et al. Midwestern Vascular 2019, Abstract 13.

CHICAGO – Numerous studies have shown conflicting results for endovascular repair in ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA), but an analysis of 4,000-plus cases from a national registry has found a 41% reduction in mortality with endovascular repair vs. open repair, according to a presentation at the annual meeting of the Midwestern Vascular Surgery Society.

“EVAR is becoming an increasingly popular strategy for treatment of AAA,” said Samer Alharthi, MD, MPH, of the University of Toledo in Ohio. “As surgeon experience and endovascular technology have improved, a greater percentage of ruptured AAA are being treated by EVAR.”

Dr. Alharthi reported on a retrospective analysis of 4,133 patients who had repair for ruptured AAA in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database from 2010 to 2016. Notably, the number of EVAR repairs continue to increase and peaked in 2015, with 53% of ruptured AAA treated by EVAR.

Over the term of the study, the overall mortality rate was 22.6% for EVAR and 33.2% for open repair (P less than .001), Dr. Alharthi said. “After adjusting for cofounders, there was a 41% reduction in the mortality rate with the EVAR approach,” he said.

The only appreciable significant difference in demographics between the two groups was a higher percentage of smokers with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease having open repair – 942 (49.2%) vs. 701 (36.2%) – and a higher percentage of patients with end-stage renal disease having EVAR, Dr. Alharthi said. Other comorbidities had no statistically significant difference.

“Complications – pneumonia, reintubation, and acute renal failure – were higher in the open than the EVAR group,” he said. For example, rates of acute renal failure were 15.4% and 8.2% (P less than.001), respectively. Rates of myocardial infarction were similar between the two groups: 6.3% and 6% (P = .74), respectively.

Dr. Alharthi had no financial relationships to disclose.

SOURCE: Alharthi S et al. Midwestern Vascular 2019, Abstract 13.

CHICAGO – Numerous studies have shown conflicting results for endovascular repair in ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA), but an analysis of 4,000-plus cases from a national registry has found a 41% reduction in mortality with endovascular repair vs. open repair, according to a presentation at the annual meeting of the Midwestern Vascular Surgery Society.

“EVAR is becoming an increasingly popular strategy for treatment of AAA,” said Samer Alharthi, MD, MPH, of the University of Toledo in Ohio. “As surgeon experience and endovascular technology have improved, a greater percentage of ruptured AAA are being treated by EVAR.”

Dr. Alharthi reported on a retrospective analysis of 4,133 patients who had repair for ruptured AAA in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database from 2010 to 2016. Notably, the number of EVAR repairs continue to increase and peaked in 2015, with 53% of ruptured AAA treated by EVAR.

Over the term of the study, the overall mortality rate was 22.6% for EVAR and 33.2% for open repair (P less than .001), Dr. Alharthi said. “After adjusting for cofounders, there was a 41% reduction in the mortality rate with the EVAR approach,” he said.

The only appreciable significant difference in demographics between the two groups was a higher percentage of smokers with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease having open repair – 942 (49.2%) vs. 701 (36.2%) – and a higher percentage of patients with end-stage renal disease having EVAR, Dr. Alharthi said. Other comorbidities had no statistically significant difference.

“Complications – pneumonia, reintubation, and acute renal failure – were higher in the open than the EVAR group,” he said. For example, rates of acute renal failure were 15.4% and 8.2% (P less than.001), respectively. Rates of myocardial infarction were similar between the two groups: 6.3% and 6% (P = .74), respectively.

Dr. Alharthi had no financial relationships to disclose.

SOURCE: Alharthi S et al. Midwestern Vascular 2019, Abstract 13.

MILAN – Skin manifestations of the vasculitides can point the way to an accurate diagnosis and provide clues about disease severity, Robert Micheletti, MD, said at the World Congress of Dermatology.

In granulomatous vasculitis, histiocytes and giant cells can play a significant role, explained Dr. Micheletti, director of the cutaneous vasculitis clinic at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. The condition may be secondary to an autoimmune disease such as lupus erythematosus or RA; a granulomatous disease such as Crohn’s disease or sarcoidosis; infections such as tuberculosis, a fungal disease, or herpes or zoster viruses, or lymphoma, Dr. Micheletti said.

However, a primary systemic vasculitis such as granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA; formerly known as Wegener’s polyangiitis) or eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA; also known as Churg-Strauss vasculitis), giant cell arteritis, or Takayasu arteritis may also be responsible, he said. Occasionally, the culprit can also be a drug-induced vasculitis.

The physical examination gives clues to the size of involved vessels, which in turn helps to classify the vasculitis, Dr. Micheletti said.

When vasculitis affects small vessels, the skin findings will be palpable purpura, urticarial papules, vesicles, and petechiae, he said, adding that “The small vessel involvement accounts for the small size of the lesions, and complement cascade and inflammation account for the palpability of the lesions and the symptomatology.” As red blood cells extravasate from the affected vessels, nonblanching purpura develop, and gravity’s effect on the deposition of immune complex material dictates how lesions are distributed.

“Manifestations more typical of medium vessel vasculitis include subcutaneous nodules, livedo reticularis, retiform purpura, larger hemorrhagic bullae, and more significant ulceration and necrosis,” he said. “If such lesions are seen, suspect medium-vessel vasculitis or vasculitis overlapping small and medium vessels.” Cutaneous or systemic polyarteritis nodosa, antineutrophilic cytoplasmic autoantibody (ANCA)–associated vasculitis, and cryoglobulinemic vasculitis are examples, he added.

The particularities of renal manifestations of vasculitis also offer clues to the vessels involved. When a vasculitis patient has glomerulonephritis, suspect small-vessel involvement, Dr. Micheletti said. However, vasculitis affecting medium-sized vessels will cause renovascular hypertension and, potentially renal arterial aneurysms.

Nerves are typically spared in small-vessel vasculitis, while wrist or foot drop can be seen in mononeuritis multiplex.

Recently, the Diagnostic and Classification Criteria in Vasculitis Study (DCVAS) looked at more than 6,800 patients at over 130 sites around the world, proposing new classification criteria for ANCA-associated vasculitis (AAV) and large-vessel vasculitis. The study found that skin findings are common in AAV, with 30%-50% of cases presenting initially with skin lesions. Petechiae and/or purpura are the most common of the skin manifestations, he said. By contrast, for EGPA, allergic and nonspecific findings were the most common findings.

Although skin biopsy can confirm the diagnosis in up to 94% of AAV cases, it’s underutilized and performed in less than half (24%-44%) of cases, Dr. Micheletti said. The study’s findings “demonstrate the importance of a good skin exam, as well as its utility for diagnosis” of vasculitis, he said.

An additional finding form the DCVAS study was that skin lesions can give clues to severity of vasculitis: “Among 1,184 patients with ANCA-associated vasculitis, those with cutaneous involvement were more likely to have systemic manifestations of disease, more likely to have such severe manifestations as glomerulonephritis, alveolar hemorrhage, and mononeuritis,” said Dr. Micheletti, with a hazard ratio of 2.0 among those individuals who had EGPA or GPA.

“Skin findings have diagnostic and, potentially, prognostic importance,” he said. “Use the physician exam and your clinical acumen to your advantage,” but always confirm vasculitis with a biopsy. “Clinicopathologic correlation is key.” A simple urinalysis will screen for renal involvement, and is of “paramount importance,” he added.

Dr. Micheletti reported that he had no relevant disclosures.

[email protected]

MILAN – Skin manifestations of the vasculitides can point the way to an accurate diagnosis and provide clues about disease severity, Robert Micheletti, MD, said at the World Congress of Dermatology.

In granulomatous vasculitis, histiocytes and giant cells can play a significant role, explained Dr. Micheletti, director of the cutaneous vasculitis clinic at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. The condition may be secondary to an autoimmune disease such as lupus erythematosus or RA; a granulomatous disease such as Crohn’s disease or sarcoidosis; infections such as tuberculosis, a fungal disease, or herpes or zoster viruses, or lymphoma, Dr. Micheletti said.

However, a primary systemic vasculitis such as granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA; formerly known as Wegener’s polyangiitis) or eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA; also known as Churg-Strauss vasculitis), giant cell arteritis, or Takayasu arteritis may also be responsible, he said. Occasionally, the culprit can also be a drug-induced vasculitis.

The physical examination gives clues to the size of involved vessels, which in turn helps to classify the vasculitis, Dr. Micheletti said.

When vasculitis affects small vessels, the skin findings will be palpable purpura, urticarial papules, vesicles, and petechiae, he said, adding that “The small vessel involvement accounts for the small size of the lesions, and complement cascade and inflammation account for the palpability of the lesions and the symptomatology.” As red blood cells extravasate from the affected vessels, nonblanching purpura develop, and gravity’s effect on the deposition of immune complex material dictates how lesions are distributed.

“Manifestations more typical of medium vessel vasculitis include subcutaneous nodules, livedo reticularis, retiform purpura, larger hemorrhagic bullae, and more significant ulceration and necrosis,” he said. “If such lesions are seen, suspect medium-vessel vasculitis or vasculitis overlapping small and medium vessels.” Cutaneous or systemic polyarteritis nodosa, antineutrophilic cytoplasmic autoantibody (ANCA)–associated vasculitis, and cryoglobulinemic vasculitis are examples, he added.

The particularities of renal manifestations of vasculitis also offer clues to the vessels involved. When a vasculitis patient has glomerulonephritis, suspect small-vessel involvement, Dr. Micheletti said. However, vasculitis affecting medium-sized vessels will cause renovascular hypertension and, potentially renal arterial aneurysms.

Nerves are typically spared in small-vessel vasculitis, while wrist or foot drop can be seen in mononeuritis multiplex.

Recently, the Diagnostic and Classification Criteria in Vasculitis Study (DCVAS) looked at more than 6,800 patients at over 130 sites around the world, proposing new classification criteria for ANCA-associated vasculitis (AAV) and large-vessel vasculitis. The study found that skin findings are common in AAV, with 30%-50% of cases presenting initially with skin lesions. Petechiae and/or purpura are the most common of the skin manifestations, he said. By contrast, for EGPA, allergic and nonspecific findings were the most common findings.

Although skin biopsy can confirm the diagnosis in up to 94% of AAV cases, it’s underutilized and performed in less than half (24%-44%) of cases, Dr. Micheletti said. The study’s findings “demonstrate the importance of a good skin exam, as well as its utility for diagnosis” of vasculitis, he said.

An additional finding form the DCVAS study was that skin lesions can give clues to severity of vasculitis: “Among 1,184 patients with ANCA-associated vasculitis, those with cutaneous involvement were more likely to have systemic manifestations of disease, more likely to have such severe manifestations as glomerulonephritis, alveolar hemorrhage, and mononeuritis,” said Dr. Micheletti, with a hazard ratio of 2.0 among those individuals who had EGPA or GPA.

“Skin findings have diagnostic and, potentially, prognostic importance,” he said. “Use the physician exam and your clinical acumen to your advantage,” but always confirm vasculitis with a biopsy. “Clinicopathologic correlation is key.” A simple urinalysis will screen for renal involvement, and is of “paramount importance,” he added.

Dr. Micheletti reported that he had no relevant disclosures.

[email protected]

MILAN – Skin manifestations of the vasculitides can point the way to an accurate diagnosis and provide clues about disease severity, Robert Micheletti, MD, said at the World Congress of Dermatology.

In granulomatous vasculitis, histiocytes and giant cells can play a significant role, explained Dr. Micheletti, director of the cutaneous vasculitis clinic at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. The condition may be secondary to an autoimmune disease such as lupus erythematosus or RA; a granulomatous disease such as Crohn’s disease or sarcoidosis; infections such as tuberculosis, a fungal disease, or herpes or zoster viruses, or lymphoma, Dr. Micheletti said.

However, a primary systemic vasculitis such as granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA; formerly known as Wegener’s polyangiitis) or eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA; also known as Churg-Strauss vasculitis), giant cell arteritis, or Takayasu arteritis may also be responsible, he said. Occasionally, the culprit can also be a drug-induced vasculitis.

The physical examination gives clues to the size of involved vessels, which in turn helps to classify the vasculitis, Dr. Micheletti said.

When vasculitis affects small vessels, the skin findings will be palpable purpura, urticarial papules, vesicles, and petechiae, he said, adding that “The small vessel involvement accounts for the small size of the lesions, and complement cascade and inflammation account for the palpability of the lesions and the symptomatology.” As red blood cells extravasate from the affected vessels, nonblanching purpura develop, and gravity’s effect on the deposition of immune complex material dictates how lesions are distributed.

“Manifestations more typical of medium vessel vasculitis include subcutaneous nodules, livedo reticularis, retiform purpura, larger hemorrhagic bullae, and more significant ulceration and necrosis,” he said. “If such lesions are seen, suspect medium-vessel vasculitis or vasculitis overlapping small and medium vessels.” Cutaneous or systemic polyarteritis nodosa, antineutrophilic cytoplasmic autoantibody (ANCA)–associated vasculitis, and cryoglobulinemic vasculitis are examples, he added.

The particularities of renal manifestations of vasculitis also offer clues to the vessels involved. When a vasculitis patient has glomerulonephritis, suspect small-vessel involvement, Dr. Micheletti said. However, vasculitis affecting medium-sized vessels will cause renovascular hypertension and, potentially renal arterial aneurysms.

Nerves are typically spared in small-vessel vasculitis, while wrist or foot drop can be seen in mononeuritis multiplex.

Recently, the Diagnostic and Classification Criteria in Vasculitis Study (DCVAS) looked at more than 6,800 patients at over 130 sites around the world, proposing new classification criteria for ANCA-associated vasculitis (AAV) and large-vessel vasculitis. The study found that skin findings are common in AAV, with 30%-50% of cases presenting initially with skin lesions. Petechiae and/or purpura are the most common of the skin manifestations, he said. By contrast, for EGPA, allergic and nonspecific findings were the most common findings.

Although skin biopsy can confirm the diagnosis in up to 94% of AAV cases, it’s underutilized and performed in less than half (24%-44%) of cases, Dr. Micheletti said. The study’s findings “demonstrate the importance of a good skin exam, as well as its utility for diagnosis” of vasculitis, he said.

An additional finding form the DCVAS study was that skin lesions can give clues to severity of vasculitis: “Among 1,184 patients with ANCA-associated vasculitis, those with cutaneous involvement were more likely to have systemic manifestations of disease, more likely to have such severe manifestations as glomerulonephritis, alveolar hemorrhage, and mononeuritis,” said Dr. Micheletti, with a hazard ratio of 2.0 among those individuals who had EGPA or GPA.

“Skin findings have diagnostic and, potentially, prognostic importance,” he said. “Use the physician exam and your clinical acumen to your advantage,” but always confirm vasculitis with a biopsy. “Clinicopathologic correlation is key.” A simple urinalysis will screen for renal involvement, and is of “paramount importance,” he added.

Dr. Micheletti reported that he had no relevant disclosures.

[email protected]

To determine the necessity of permanent monitoring of small aortic aneurysms in the elderly, Mark Rockley, MD, of the Ottawa Hospital  and his colleagues investigated the yield of ultrasound surveillance for small abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) in octogenarians, as compared with a younger population. Their goal was to detect the frequency of AAA growth reaching the threshold size for repair. Secondary objectives included analysis of the incidence of AAA repair, and the cost-effectiveness of surveillance.

In Saturday’s Scientific Session 8, Dr. Rockley will report on their retrospective cohort study performed on all patients undergoing AAA surveillance in Ottawa during 2007-2017. The patients were split into two groups by enrollment age (those younger and those equal to or older than 80 years of age) with cross-over to prevent lead-time bias, and stratification by enrollment AAA size. 
The two cohorts were cross-referenced with the Ottawa Surgical Database, leveraging the common health region to assure complete data capture, according to Dr. Rockley. 

The threshold size for repair was sex specific (women at 5.0cm, men at 5.5 cm) and the factors influencing AAA growth rate were assessed using multiple linear regression. Analyses with Cox proportional hazards and multiple regression models adjusted for sex and enrollment aneurysm size, and cost-effectiveness were analyzed by referencing Ontario billing codes.

The researchers found that 1,231 patients underwent serial ultrasound surveillance, of which 460 (37.4%) were octogenarians at the time of enrollment. Multiple linear regression demonstrated that old age, male sex, and smaller enrollment aneurysm size were significantly protective against AAA growth. 

Overall, 355 (28.8%) subjects reached the AAA size threshold for repair, and 313 (25.4%) underwent AAA repair. Octogenarians were half as likely to reach the AAA threshold size for repair when compared with their younger counterparts, and of the 355 subjects whose AAA reached the threshold size for repair, octogenarians were half as likely to undergo elective AAA repair). 

Repair of ruptured AAA was rare (0.94%) and age differences were insignificant. The cost of ultrasound surveillance alone to identify one patient who ultimately received elective AAA repair was more than four times more expensive for octogenarians with 3.0-3.9–cm enrollment aneurysms, when compared with the rest of the study sample ($12,080 vs. $2,915, in Canadian dollars, respectively), said Dr. Rockley.

“Our study showed that octogenarians are half as likely as their younger counterparts to experience aortic growth reaching th.e repair threshold size Furthermore, in the event of reaching the size threshold, octogenarians are half as likely to undergo repair, without a significantly increased risk of requiring repair for AAA rupture. In the context of patient-specific factors and wishes, surveillance of AAA less than 4cm in octogenarians is costly and unlikely to be beneficial.” Dr. Rockley concluded.

Saturday, June 15
8-9:30 a.m.
Gaylord National, Potomac A/B
S8: Scientific Session 8: SS29

To determine the necessity of permanent monitoring of small aortic aneurysms in the elderly, Mark Rockley, MD, of the Ottawa Hospital  and his colleagues investigated the yield of ultrasound surveillance for small abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) in octogenarians, as compared with a younger population. Their goal was to detect the frequency of AAA growth reaching the threshold size for repair. Secondary objectives included analysis of the incidence of AAA repair, and the cost-effectiveness of surveillance.

In Saturday’s Scientific Session 8, Dr. Rockley will report on their retrospective cohort study performed on all patients undergoing AAA surveillance in Ottawa during 2007-2017. The patients were split into two groups by enrollment age (those younger and those equal to or older than 80 years of age) with cross-over to prevent lead-time bias, and stratification by enrollment AAA size. 
The two cohorts were cross-referenced with the Ottawa Surgical Database, leveraging the common health region to assure complete data capture, according to Dr. Rockley. 

The threshold size for repair was sex specific (women at 5.0cm, men at 5.5 cm) and the factors influencing AAA growth rate were assessed using multiple linear regression. Analyses with Cox proportional hazards and multiple regression models adjusted for sex and enrollment aneurysm size, and cost-effectiveness were analyzed by referencing Ontario billing codes.

The researchers found that 1,231 patients underwent serial ultrasound surveillance, of which 460 (37.4%) were octogenarians at the time of enrollment. Multiple linear regression demonstrated that old age, male sex, and smaller enrollment aneurysm size were significantly protective against AAA growth. 

Overall, 355 (28.8%) subjects reached the AAA size threshold for repair, and 313 (25.4%) underwent AAA repair. Octogenarians were half as likely to reach the AAA threshold size for repair when compared with their younger counterparts, and of the 355 subjects whose AAA reached the threshold size for repair, octogenarians were half as likely to undergo elective AAA repair). 

Repair of ruptured AAA was rare (0.94%) and age differences were insignificant. The cost of ultrasound surveillance alone to identify one patient who ultimately received elective AAA repair was more than four times more expensive for octogenarians with 3.0-3.9–cm enrollment aneurysms, when compared with the rest of the study sample ($12,080 vs. $2,915, in Canadian dollars, respectively), said Dr. Rockley.

“Our study showed that octogenarians are half as likely as their younger counterparts to experience aortic growth reaching th.e repair threshold size Furthermore, in the event of reaching the size threshold, octogenarians are half as likely to undergo repair, without a significantly increased risk of requiring repair for AAA rupture. In the context of patient-specific factors and wishes, surveillance of AAA less than 4cm in octogenarians is costly and unlikely to be beneficial.” Dr. Rockley concluded.

Saturday, June 15
8-9:30 a.m.
Gaylord National, Potomac A/B
S8: Scientific Session 8: SS29

To determine the necessity of permanent monitoring of small aortic aneurysms in the elderly, Mark Rockley, MD, of the Ottawa Hospital  and his colleagues investigated the yield of ultrasound surveillance for small abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) in octogenarians, as compared with a younger population. Their goal was to detect the frequency of AAA growth reaching the threshold size for repair. Secondary objectives included analysis of the incidence of AAA repair, and the cost-effectiveness of surveillance.

In Saturday’s Scientific Session 8, Dr. Rockley will report on their retrospective cohort study performed on all patients undergoing AAA surveillance in Ottawa during 2007-2017. The patients were split into two groups by enrollment age (those younger and those equal to or older than 80 years of age) with cross-over to prevent lead-time bias, and stratification by enrollment AAA size. 
The two cohorts were cross-referenced with the Ottawa Surgical Database, leveraging the common health region to assure complete data capture, according to Dr. Rockley. 

The threshold size for repair was sex specific (women at 5.0cm, men at 5.5 cm) and the factors influencing AAA growth rate were assessed using multiple linear regression. Analyses with Cox proportional hazards and multiple regression models adjusted for sex and enrollment aneurysm size, and cost-effectiveness were analyzed by referencing Ontario billing codes.

The researchers found that 1,231 patients underwent serial ultrasound surveillance, of which 460 (37.4%) were octogenarians at the time of enrollment. Multiple linear regression demonstrated that old age, male sex, and smaller enrollment aneurysm size were significantly protective against AAA growth. 

Overall, 355 (28.8%) subjects reached the AAA size threshold for repair, and 313 (25.4%) underwent AAA repair. Octogenarians were half as likely to reach the AAA threshold size for repair when compared with their younger counterparts, and of the 355 subjects whose AAA reached the threshold size for repair, octogenarians were half as likely to undergo elective AAA repair). 

Repair of ruptured AAA was rare (0.94%) and age differences were insignificant. The cost of ultrasound surveillance alone to identify one patient who ultimately received elective AAA repair was more than four times more expensive for octogenarians with 3.0-3.9–cm enrollment aneurysms, when compared with the rest of the study sample ($12,080 vs. $2,915, in Canadian dollars, respectively), said Dr. Rockley.

“Our study showed that octogenarians are half as likely as their younger counterparts to experience aortic growth reaching th.e repair threshold size Furthermore, in the event of reaching the size threshold, octogenarians are half as likely to undergo repair, without a significantly increased risk of requiring repair for AAA rupture. In the context of patient-specific factors and wishes, surveillance of AAA less than 4cm in octogenarians is costly and unlikely to be beneficial.” Dr. Rockley concluded.

Saturday, June 15
8-9:30 a.m.
Gaylord National, Potomac A/B
S8: Scientific Session 8: SS29